The Latest Way In Which The RIAA's Sue 'Em All Education Campaign Has Backfired

from the whoops dept

The RIAA has always said (though, many don't believe it) that a big part of the reason that they're suing lots of people for sharing unauthorized files is as part of an "education campaign." The industry continues to insist that people just don't know file sharing is illegal, and the lawsuits are the only way to get that across. Of course, since they file another batch of these lawsuits every month or so, it seems like that strategy really doesn't make sense any more. After all, they filed a bunch more lawsuits this week, and almost no one wrote about it at all -- it's just not newsworthy. Instead, the stories that are getting written are about how the RIAA screws up these lawsuits -- such as the latest case of a woman who claims she has no idea how to download music. It's hard to see how that helps the RIAA's education campaign -- other than to raise more questions about this legal strategy and how sound it really is.

Re: Education? Intimidation.

That already happened. I got about $13, and the record industry got to say "there now, we're even".I want artists to put out records without the damn record labels. It's entirely possible with the internet. Hell, it was possible before the internet became mainstream, now it's just easy.

No Subject Given

a big part of the reason that they're suing lots of people for sharing unauthorized files is as part of an "education campaign."

I know you have your frame, and I respect that. But the better way to describe this ongoing action is largely a legal harassment program, targeted at those who can't afford to defend against it. Sounds a little like patent troll strategy, eh?

Re: Education? Intimidation.

Yeah not everyone in the music industry got started on a lable. A prime example in the 80's was MC Hammer. HE sold records out of the trunk of his car and became pretty well known amoung us kids. So much that when a lable came knocking he was able to name his own price. Today it's even easiser to self-promote.

Re: Education? Intimidation.

Re: Education? Intimidation.

Good point.

Indeed, there are literally hundreds of sites on the net now that allow artists to:Share music, either samples or the full deal;Promote their music;Sell stuff to go with their music;Sell their self-produced CDs (no labels required).

I realize that not all of our music is of quality or desirability â€œup thereâ€? with the great artists of music, or maybe not even that notable/good - but we're producing what's in our heart and putting out for the world to enjoy.

Re: Education? Intimidation.

ho wash this is america and i will install what the hell i want to. well to be quite honest i would do it even if i was in china, but thats not the point. We pay for music so many damn times its crazy. We have to pay to see it in our movies, we have to pay to see it on mtv(cable) we have to pay to buy the cd(record label) we have to pay to listen to it on the radion. come on people how many fucking times do i have to pay for one song?????????????????????????????????? and still listen to the record companies cry about not being able to buy an island cause i only bought the song 8 times instead 9!!!

Re: Education

My earlier comment

Seems the Hitler reference ruffled a feather or two. It was used in concert with the fact that a lot of people call the RIAA "The Music Nazi's".

They have yet to explain to my satisfaction how sharing music with no money exchange is any different from my lending you a CD to listen to. The fact that you can sign CDs out of your public library seems like that should make every public library system guilty of illegal distribution as well.

I once had an email exchange with Janis Ian, who told me that when she releases new material on her web site, CD sales typically go UP.

Re: Education

Re: Education? Intimidation.

ho wash this is america and i will install what the hell i want to. well to be quite honest i would do it even if i was in china, but thats not the point. We pay for music so many damn times its crazy. We have to pay to see it in our movies, we have to pay to see it on mtv(cable) we have to pay to buy the cd(record label) we have to pay to listen to it on the radion. come on people how many fucking times do i have to pay for one song?????????????????????????????????? and still listen to the record companies cry about not being able to buy an island cause i only bought the song 8 times instead 9!!!Man, you are an idiot.1. ho wash? wtf? hog wash maybe? - use preview, it's there for a reason.2. You pay to see the move - not hear the song in the movie. If you pay to hear the song in the movie, then you have got other issues and might want to thing about getting some help.3. You pay for cable, MTV comes with it. It's a service, you pay for it, get over it.4. You buy the CD so you can have the song to listen to any time you like. That doesn't mean anything else the song is played on (movies) should be free. Dumbass.5. You pay for radio? I hope is XM radio because the last I checked, unless you're outside of the US, commercial radio is free. XM radio is a service. Again, you pay for services, get over that too.

Re: Education

RIAA

I'm a recording artist, and most of my friends have about 10 GB or more of MP3s. That is a lot of stolen music. I support what the RIAA is doing. I think its ridiculous for non-artists to feel that its OK to steal all this music when its clearly against the law and against the wishes of most of the artists. If an artist wants to give away their music, thats fine, but don't ask a record company to pay all their bills and recording costs in the process.

Re: RIAA

Repeat after me class - sharing copyrighted music is copyright infringement, NOT STEALING. Stealing requires a physical thing.Now wirte that 100 times on the chalkboard during recess.I honestly hope that you enjoy your relationship with your new RIAA overlords. May you bask in the radioactive warmth of their toxic embrace.Meanwhile I will be sure never to buy your music.

Education

Actually, I have become educated on this. I no longer listen to music, or go to movies. It's similar to breaking the TV habit--after a couple of months, you don't really miss it.

I listen to books on tape/CD in the car if I'm by myself, I spend time on the computer if I'm at home alone, and there are many ways to enjoy myself with friends that don't involve movies or music. Try interactive activities when you are with others; it's a whole different world.

recording artist

Mr Lieder, please define "recording artist" as it applies to you. Do you make your living solely on your record sales and touring? Is someone downloading one of your songs keeping your son from attending Stanford?

I know a lot of "recording artists". Most of them have some kind of digital recorder in their basement studio and they get together with their friends to drink beer and play music on Saturday afternoon when they aren't working at the factory of the 7-11. They too are "recording artists" in the literal sense.

I played part time since age 23 and full time for 12 years. I toured, I wrote, I recorded, produced, arranged... If anybody wants to flatter me by downloading any of my music, they are welcome to it.

Your web site, once I navigated around the broken link, is impressive but I came away with the impression that you are a musician like Keanu Reeves is a musician. The pentagram sent kind of a mixed message, as did your presence on Garageband.com.

The people here are directing their comments to the multi mega millionaires who continue to take greed and selfishness to new heights, not to some part time player who is glad to get a gig at some dive in Santa Monica. I spent my years in the latter group. Anybody wants a copy of "Kiss You All Over" can have it. And if they can find it anywhere, send me a copy. That was recorded 15 years ago and I don't even have it any more.

Re: RIAA

I agree, it has been reported that only 5% of the artists signed actually make a profit. Here is the twist... record labels make money off the artists 95% of the time. The fact is the label takes and bills the artist for everything first and most time exaggerating the cost of their services to make a profit, then the artist makes what is left over. The labels and the RIAA are the thieves they are stealing from the artists. That is not copyright infringement, that’s just plain stealing. Someone needs to create an org to put a check on the RIAA and the rest of the music industry and how they distro the artists funds. Maybe we could call it "ARIAA" How does that sound people? Check out www.fadestyle.com a small independent music studio supporting independent artists and NOT the RIAA.

No Subject Given

anybody involved in the distribution a 'service' that requires payment for their product is not an "artist". that, friends, is an 'entrepenuer'. we should now refer to the people as recording entrepenuers.

Re: Not a problem with old music

You're exactly right... seriously, the new music is barely listenable anyway. Although I'm 21 I prefer the older stuff... the newest music I care to listen to is something out of the 80's. I was pretty much raised on Frank Sinatra and Neil Diamond... and anyway, where in the heck can I find an actual hard copy of Toghether in Electric Dreams!

Re: Education? Intimidation.

Yes, but think about when the standard format for music changed from Vinyl records to cassette tapes, oh goodness! You can record on to tapes, that just won't do, because the record that you bought in 1968 and you all ready paid for isn't going to be bought in the new format. Same thing with the transfer over to CDs, well, gotta buy the same title again to keep up with the technology, but you shouldn't be able to burn CDs, right? Wrong, you all ready paid for the product, why should you have to buy it again. And now they are freaking out about the new switch in format, claiming they are losing money, but what about us? I have CDs that I have bought that I have tried to put into my computer, not for file sharing, but for personal use, that the computer won't let me upload, so I paid for an obsolete product. The IPOD and other MP3 players sold about $4.5 Billion last year, and how many of those people do you think are buying MP3s from iTunes? Their (record companies) profit margins have gone down just a little bit since the advent of file sharing and the MP3 player boom, but when you think about it, if an album has 15 songs on it, and you are buying the whole album song by song on iTunes (though that would be a stupid way to go about it) you would be spending the same amount as you would in a record store for the same product. The RIAA freaked out about recordable cassette tapes (they didn't bring down the empire), and then they freaked out about CD-R/RW (did they break the iindustry and make them go hungry?), now they are freaking out about file sharing. What a bunch of babies...

Re: recording artist

I'll flatter you by downloading your music - put up a link!I'm a recording artist as well, and for me the experience of listening to an album of entirely my own creation was one of the most fulfilling in my life(thank you BOSS BR-1180). Making it available online and sharing it with friends is just the icing on the cake.And sure, I've dreamed about making a living from what I usually call "playing". It just seems too good to be possible.

Re: Education

Actually, I have become educated on this. I no longer listen to music, or go to movies. It's similar to breaking the TV habit--after a couple of months, you don't really miss it.

Jon while that is completely admirable, I don't think it works for the bulk of society. Sharing music, books, and favorite films is a social activity which many people enjoy. The problem here is what continually comes up on TechDirt threads: If it's easy to make illegal copies, folks will do it. I admit that I've done it before, not because I wanted to deprive the author of revenue, but because of the convenience of passing on a few "copies".

I think what needs to happen here is someone needs to find a reasonable compromise between sharing media and outright ripping it off. If I find a cool band or a really cool article, I want to be able to send that to a few friends and have them check it out. On the other hand I don't think I should have the right to make a wholesale copy of my DVD collection and send it to 10 of my friends so they don't have to buy it themselves. File sharing falls to some sort of in-between gray area.

Ultimately I think the RIAA, MPAA, etc. need to examine why people are sharing files and what they are doing with them. If it's a clear cut case of folks not wanting to shell out the money for the album then fine, sue 'em for copyright infringement. But if it's a case of people wanting to share stuff between friends saying "hey check this out, it's cool", then figure out some way to let people send each other files so that it doesn't threaten your ability to sell them a product in the end. What you'll end up with is a grassroots marketing campaign that no amount of high priced marketing consultants is going to bring you.